On Sunday 14 April 2013 16:09:21 Paul Eggleton wrote: > On Sunday 14 April 2013 17:04:23 Martin Jansa wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 04:01:59PM +0100, Paul Eggleton wrote: > > > On Sunday 14 April 2013 15:49:34 Martin Jansa wrote: > > > > * they conflict in sysroot anyway, should be converted to > > > > PACKAGECONFIG > > > > > > > > but because dbus is already built in most images I'll let it for > > > > someone > > > > who has such use-case > > > > > > Hang on a sec, I agree it's good to get rid of this second recipe, but > > > you're changing the default - so at least give people a way to influence > > > it. It's not too hard to put in PACKAGECONFIG now while you're changing > > > the recipe anyway. > > > > is there someone who needs dnsmasq without dbus? > > It's not too hard to imagine a minimal system that wants one and not the > other. We had two recipes originally for a reason. Sure, it's fine if you're > already using something that uses dbus and therefore you'll have it anyway, > but not everyone is in the same situation.
FYI, I already have a patch to do this coming as part of my meta-networking moves patchset which I am re-applying at the moment. Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
